This dissertation identified and described the legal requirements imposed by federal disability mandates and case law related to emerging technology. Additionally, the researcher created a legal framework (guidelines) for higher education institutions to consider during policy development and implementation of emerging technology by providing an analysis of existing case law concerning emerging technology and students with disabilities. The problem is that many postsecondary administrators and faculty often have very limited knowledge of their legal responsibilities under federal disability legislation because they find the legislation to be ambiguous, controversial, and/or complex (GAO, 2009; Leyser et al., 2011; Orr & Goodman, 2010; Porter, Cormick, & Hayes, 2007; Rao, 2004). This dissertation utilized a legal research methodology and analyzed the federal disability mandates that govern higher education, regulations from the Departments of Education and Justice, and case law regarding students with disabilities rights to equal access to the benefits of the goods and services provided by postsecondary institutions. There has been a rise in the number complaints filed with the Departments of Education and Justice and lawsuits filed in district courts. Federal disability mandates do not explicitly mention the term "emerging technology," but mentions goods, services, and benefits. When institutions deploy emerging technology for instructional purposes, the technology becomes a good, service, and/or benefit of the institution. Therefore, students with disabilities must receive equal access to emerging technology, or to an equally effective accommodation, in order for them to enjoy benefits equal to their non-disabled peers (U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, 2010b). According to the Social Model of Disability, systemic barriers created by society (i.e. institutions of higher education) hinder individuals with disabilities from enjoying full and equal access to the benefits of society, and intervention methods (i.e. changes in policies and practices) help remove the systemic barriers and maximize equal access (Krahn, Putnam, Drum, & Powers, 2006). In an effort to reduce educational disadvantages for students with disabilities and to eradicate discriminatory practices by institutions, this dissertation could serve as an intervention method. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]